Dont Blame Liberals for Gun Control, Blame Nixon/Reagan/Bush for over 30 years
cutting through the crap of the so called 'right-wing conservatives' in the U.S., or who most people think are right-wing.
Don't Blame Liberals for Gun Control
by Richard Poe
NEWSMAX.COM - Anti-gun crusaders seem worried about the advent of a Republican administration. Heaven knows why. Republicans, in recent years, have managed to do nearly as much damage to the Second Amendment as Democrats.
In 1969, journalist William Safire asked Richard Nixon what he thought about gun control. "Guns are an abomination," Nixon replied. According to Safire, Nixon went on to confess that, "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."
It was President George Bush, Sr. who banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."
It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.
Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay."
One of the most aggressive gun control advocates today is Republican mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City, whose administration sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and whose police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.
Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation's strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison.
Gun control crusaders argue that the Republicans are simply yielding to grassroots pressure, to gain political advantage. But polls show little evidence of such pressure.
A Gallup/CNN/USA Today survey taken in June 1999 - only two months after the Littleton massacre - showed that the number of Americans who favored stricter gun laws had declined by 20 percent since 1990.
Public support for gun control has dwindled even further since then. An Associated Press poll released on the one-year anniversary of the Littleton shootings shows that Americans favor strict enforcement of existing laws over new gun laws - the exact position of the National Rifle Association (NRA) - by 42 to 33 percent.
That same month, a survey by the Pew Research Center showed that only 6 percent of Americans believed that tougher gun laws would prevent future school shootings.
Meanwhile, a Tarrance Group poll has shown that only 5 percent of Americans want gunmakers and gun dealers held responsible for misuse of firearms.
Clearly, the pressure for gun control is not coming from the grassroots. It comes from those layers of society that the left calls the "ruling classes" - academics, Hollywood stars, Washington insiders and multibillion-dollar media conglomerates.
The latter are particularly influential in pushing anti-gun propaganda. A study by the Media Research Center released in January 2000 showed that television news stories calling for stricter gun laws outnumbered those opposing such laws by a ratio of 10 to 1.
The blame for this media bias is traditionally assigned to "liberal journalists." And, indeed, most journalists do hold left-of-center views. A 1996 survey of working journalists by the Roper Center and the Freedom Forum showed that 89 percent had voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only 4 percent identified themselves as Republicans and only 2 percent as conservatives.
Yet, their "liberal" views probably have less impact on the media's anti-gun bias than most people assume. Rank-and-file reporters have little power to influence the political spin even of their own stories.
When I worked at the New York Post in the mid-1980s, I found the newsroom filled with liberals. They grumbled constantly about the paper's conservative slant. But they went along with it, because it was company policy.
Liberal news organizations are no different. Political bias comes from the top. Rank-and-file reporters simply do what they are told.
Those of us who cherish our Second Amendment rights are keeping our fingers crossed about George W. Bush. But the monolithic commitment America's "ruling classes" have shown toward gun control makes one wonder whether even a president is free to buck the current.
Bonfire of the Liberties
by William Norman Grigg
Mass politicical murder is carried out through standing armies and police forces in other words, the very people to whom the UN wishes to give a monopoly on firearms
Shortly after Cambodia fell into the hands of the Khmer Rouge, soldiers were dispatched to the countryside to disarm the populace. "We are here now to protect you, and no one has a need for a weapon any more," one survivor of the Cambodian holocaust recalled in the January 24, 1994 issue of The New Yorker. The account described how "everyone who had a weapon ... handed over [their] rifles and pistols and ammunition, which the soldiers tossed on a pile" and disposed of. In short order the rulers of what R.J. Rummel calls the "Cambodian Hell State" were stacking skulls in piles as they slaughtered one-third of the disarmed population.
The new United Nations propaganda film Armed to the Teeth: The World-Wide Plague of Small Arms proudly depicts UN "peacekeepers" carrying out the same type of civilian disarmament that was the overture to the Cambodian holocaust. One UN official is displayed on screen asking a group of Albanian peasants: "You've delivered all the arms, now? No more arms in this village?" UN officials, in the company of army officers and police, are shown conducting a propaganda session for the village's schoolchildren. Each student is given an anti-gun t-shirt and a lecture about disarmament. As a "symbolic act of disarmament," seized weapons are stacked in a pile and burned in the local public square. Symbolically setting collected firearms ablaze call it the "Bonfire of the Liberties" has become a familiar ritual in UN civilian disarmament campaigns. "On a memorable night in Timbuktu, the flames of peace consumed 3,000 rifles," intones the film's narrator. In Mozambique, collected arms are dynamited; elsewhere, "peacekeepers" cut confiscated weapons into scrap or melt them into slag.
For more than a decade, THE NEW AMERICAN has repeatedly warned that the UN's oft-repeated intention to pursue "general and complete disarmament" includes universal civilian disarmament; Armed to the Teeth validates those warnings in remarkable detail.
"For its first fifty years, the United Nations focused its disarmament efforts on addressing the proliferation of nuclear weapons," observes the narrator. The world body is now focusing its efforts on what it calls the global "small arms crisis" meaning the possession of firearms by civilians. The propaganda film unambiguously defines "legal" weapons as those "used by armies and police forces to protect us." Civilian-owned weapons, by way of contrast, are supposedly "illegitimate" and "bring insecurity, pain, suffering and devastation."
Only through a global crackdown on civilian arms ownership and the empowerment of the UN, insists the narrator, "can genocide as happened in Rwanda be prevented." But mass political murder is carried out through standing armies and nationalized police forces in other words, the very people to whom the UN wishes to give a monopoly on firearms. The genocidal state in Rwanda occupied a seat on the UN Security Council, and Kofi Annan then head of the peacekeeping division, now secretary-general prevented UN "peacekeepers" from taking timely steps to prevent the slaughter.
The video shows American schoolchildren participating in a UN-approved indoctrination session, where they are trained to evangelize on behalf of civilian disarmament. "Stop selling guns," one young boy declares to the interviewer. "Only policemen should have guns." "I would just stop making guns all of a sudden and then just have the government prohibit guns from everybody," adds a young girl. Part of the indoctrination involves the recitation of a pledge "never to touch a weapon."
Cultivating an aversive response to firearms is a prime objective of the UN's global civilian disarmament campaign. The video repeatedly indulges in the pathetic fallacy that inanimate objects display human traits by depicting firearms as possessed of independent, malevolent intent. "Small arms are not fussy about the company they keep. They can murder indiscriminately," insists the narrator. "The gun that killed in Africa can do it again in Latin America, or in Asia .... Humankind is beginning a new millennium under the sign of the gun. Small arms are like uninvited guests who won't leave. Once they take over a country, they are virtually impossible to get rid of."
To rid the world of this supposed pestilence, the UN urges the destruction of "illegal guns and regulating the production and sale of legal weapons" (remember that "legal," as defined by the UN, means government-controlled) on a global basis. New global civilian disarmament protocols will be discussed at the UN's "Conference on Illicit Trade In Small Arms and Light Weapons," which will be held in June and July of this year.
Behind the UN's enthusiasm for civilian disarmament, as practiced in Communist Cambodia and elsewhere, is an affinity for totalitarian bloodshed as also practiced in those same unhappy countries. In their book Murder of a Gentle Land, John Barron and Anthony Paul recall that when Khmer Rouge official Ieng Sary, who boasted: "We have cleansed the cities," appeared before the General Assembly, he was greeted with an enthusiastic ovation.
CLEANSED. WHAT AN APPROPRIATE WORD. THEN WHAMMO! OFF TO THE DEATH CAMPS YOU GO!
add a comment on this article
add a comment on this article